Indication for sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer when core biopsy shows ductal carcinoma in situ

Update on the management of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: current approach and future perspectives

The standard treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ became well established through the results of several valuable clinical trials, and its therapeutic benefits have now come to be taken for granted. Ductal carcinoma in situ has an extremely good prognosis with the current treatment approach, with a 10-year breast cancer-specific survival rate of 97-98%. According to one retrospective cohort study, the breast cancer-specific survival rate of patients with low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ does not differ significantly between patients undergoing and not undergoing surgery. Some patients with ductal carcinoma in situ are not at a risk of progression to invasive cancer, but the predictors of such progression have not yet been clearly identified. Therefore, the same therapeutic strategies have been used to treat ductal carcinoma in situ and under the assumption that they have risks of invasive breast cancer, and a well-balanced risk/benefit ratio in respect of treatment has not yet been achieved. Based on the results of several recent clinical trials aimed at ensuring provision of a well-balanced treatment for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ which carries a good prognosis, de-escalation of postoperative adjuvant therapy has now begun. Currently, not only is the optimization of postoperative adjuvant therapy accelerating, but also clinical trials to de-escalate basic surgical treatments are under way. There is a possibility of achieving individualized treatment for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast with reduced treatment intervention. In this review, we present an overview of the current treatment approaches and potential future management strategies for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

Is Axillary Assessment of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast Necessary in All Cases?

BACKGROUND

Staging of the axilla in women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a point of controversy. We aimed to assess whether there is a group of patients in whom axillary assessment can be avoided and whether the likelihood of underdiagnosis of infiltrating carcinoma is sufficient to justify this evaluation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a multicenter, prospective, observational study of patients who were operated on between 2008 and 2018 in three Spanish hospitals, with a diagnosis by radiological or excisional biopsy of DCIS and clinically and radiologically negative axilla.

RESULTS

A total of 530 patients with a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS were studied. An axillary assessment was performed in 77% of the patients. In 397 patients, selective sentinel lymph node biopsy was performed. Axillary involvement was found in 7.2% of all patients, which dropped to 2.15% if we only included DCIS diagnosed after a definitive anatomical pathology analysis. Underdiagnosis was correlated with the type of biopsy performed: the risk was 1.34 times as high if the biopsy was performed with a core needle. The risk of lymph node metastasis was higher when there was lymphovascular invasion and when mastectomy was performed.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose an axilla management algorithm in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS. The patients who would benefit from sentinel lymph node biopsy would be those who are not candidates for breast-conserving surgery, those with a BIRADS 5 lesion biopsied by core-needle biopsy, and those whose definitive diagnosis is lymphovascular invasion.

Predictors of invasive disease in patients preoperatively diagnosed with ductal carcinoma without stromal invasion, with breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and ultrasound (US)

BACKGROUND

A preoperative diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is sometimes upstaged to invasive disease postoperatively. Our objective was to clarify the predictive factors of invasive disease using preoperative imaging and to investigate the positive ratio of sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) and the incidence of invasive disease.

METHODS

The subjects were 402 patients with preoperatively diagnosed ductal carcinoma without stromal invasion who underwent breast surgery with concomitant SLN surgery in January 2007 to December 2016. Of the 306 included patients, all 306 patients underwent preoperative MRI and US assessment. Outcomes were analyzed for significance using univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 306 patients, 115 (37.6%) had invasive disease and 191 (62.4%) had DCIS only. Of the 115 patients with invasive disease, 5 (4.4%) and 4 (3.5%) had macro- and micrometastases in SLN. On the other hand, of the 191 patients with DCIS, only 1 (0.5%) had a micrometastasis. Predictors of invasive disease in the univariate analysis included having a palpable mass, were varied by biopsy method, having a US hypoechoic mass, MRI enhancement, or MRI large enhanced lesion; the size of the mass enhancement ≥ 1.1 cm or a spread of non-mass enhancement ≥ 3.1 cm (P = 0.003). Predictors of invasive disease in the multivariate analysis included US hypoechoic mass and MRI large enhanced lesion.

CONCLUSION

We need to perform SLN biopsy for preoperatively diagnosed DCIS when patients have predictors of invasive disease, but SLN biopsy will no longer be essential for patients when they have no predictors of invasive disease.

Are Nomograms Useful in Predicting Upstage From Ductal Carcinoma In Situ to Invasive Carcinoma Requiring Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy?

The upstage rate from ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on core biopsy to invasive carcinoma at definitive excision ranges from 20 to 30%. Nomograms have been developed to aid in the prediction of upstaging so as to guide surgical planning with respect to performance of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). The aim of this study was to evaluate the ability of these nomograms to predict upstaging within our public hospital population. A retrospective review of patients with DCIS from 2013 to 2018 at a single institution was performed. Individualized probability of upstage was calculated using the Samsung Medical Center (SMC) and Annals of Surgical Oncology (ASO) nomograms. Areas under the receiver operating characteristic curves were calculated to assess the discriminative power of each. Of 105 patients with DCIS, 31 (29.5%) were upstaged to invasive disease. The SMC and ASO nomograms demonstrated area under the curves (AUCs) of .65 (OR = 1.023, 95% CI 1.004-1.042, P = .02) and .60 (OR = 1.035, 95% CI 1.003-1.068, P = .03), respectively. While SMC provided greater discrimination in our cohort, the performance of these nomograms as reliable clinical adjuncts to guide SLNB decision-making in this cohort was less than optimal and thus should not be the sole factor in determining individual upstage risk.

Application of magnetic resonance computer-aided diagnosis for preoperatively determining invasive disease in ultrasonography-guided core needle biopsy-proven ductal carcinoma in situ

The aim of this study was to analyze kinetic and morphologic features using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) with computer-aided diagnosis (CAD) to predict occult invasive components in cases of biopsy-proven ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).We enrolled 138 patients with 141 breasts who underwent preoperative breast MRI and were diagnosed with DCIS via ultrasonography (US)-guided core needle biopsy performed at our institution during January 2009 to December 2012. Their clinical, mammographic, ultrasonographic, MRI, and final histologic findings were retrospectively reviewed. Their mammographic, ultrasonographic, and MRI findings were analyzed according to the American College of Radiology Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. CAD findings of detectability, initial (fast, medium, and slow) and delay (persistent, plateau, and washout) phase enhancement kinetic descriptor, peak enhancement percentage, and lesion size were evaluated. Continuous and categorical variables were analyzed using independent t test and χ or Fisher exact test, respectively. Independent factors for predicting the presence of invasive component were evaluated by multivariate logistic regression analysis.Final histologic findings revealed that 55 breasts (39%) had DCIS with an invasive component. MRI-detected, CAD-detected, or pathologic lesion size (P = .002, P = .001, P < .001, respectively), delay washout kinetics and detectability on CAD (P < .001 and P = .004, respectively), presence of symptoms (P = .01), presence of comedonecrosis (P < .001), nuclear grade (P = .001), abnormality on mammography (P = .02), or US (P = .03) were significantly different between pure DCIS and the DCIS with an invasive component group on univariate analysis. Of those findings, multivariate analysis revealed that delay washout on CAD (odds ratio [OR], 4.36; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.96-9.69; P = .0003) and pathologic size (OR, 1.29; 95% CI 1.05-1.57; P = .014) were independent predictive factors for the presence of an invasive component.Delay washout kinetic features measured by CAD and pathologic tumor size are potentially useful for predicting occult invasion in cases of biopsy-proven DCIS.Breast MRI including a CAD system would be helpful for predicting invasive components in cases of biopsy-proven DCIS and for selecting patients for sentinel lymph node biopsy.

The predictive value of calcification for the grading of ductal carcinoma in situ in Chinese patients

High-grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) requires resection due to the high risk of developing invasive breast cancer. The predictive powers of noninvasive predictors for high-grade DCIS remain contradictory. This study aimed to explore the predictive value of calcification for high-grade DCIS in Chinese patients.This was a retrospective study of Chinese DCIS patients recruited from the Women's Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University between January and December 2018. The patients were divided into calcification and non-calcification groups based on the mammography results. The correlation of calcification with the pathologic stage of DCIS was evaluated using the multivariable analysis. The predictive value of calcification for DCIS grading was examined using the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve.The pathologic grade of DCIS was not associated with calcification morphology (P = .902), calcification distribution (P = .252), or breast density (P = .188). The multivariable analysis showed that the presence of calcification was independently associated with high pathologic grade of DCIS (OR = 3.206, 95% CI = 1.315-7.817, P = .010), whereas the age, hypertension, menopause, and mammography BI-RADS were not (all P > .05) associated with the grade of DCIS. The ROC analysis of the predictive value of calcification for DCIS grading showed that the area under the curve was 0.626 (P = .019), with a sensitivity of 73.1%, specificity of 52.2%, positive predictive value of 72.2%, and negative predictive value of 53.3%.The presence of calcification is independently associated with high pathologic grade of DCIS and could predict high-grade DCIS in Chinese patients.

Development of Prediction Model Including MicroRNA Expression for Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis in ER-Positive and HER2-Negative Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

The aim of our study is to find microRNAs (miRNAs) associated with sentinel lymph node metastasis (SLNM) and to develop a prediction model for SLNM in ER-positive and HER2-negative (ER+/HER2-) breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In the present study, only ER+/HER2- primary breast cancer was considered. The discovery set for SLNM-associated miRNAs included 10 tumors with and 10 tumors without SLNM. The training and validation sets both included 100 tumors. miRNA expression in tumors was examined comprehensively by miRNA microarray in the discovery set and by droplet digital PCR in the training and validation sets.

RESULTS

In the discovery set, miR-98, miR-22, and miR-223 were found to be significantly (P < 0.001, fold-change > 2.5) associated with SLNM. In the training set, we constructed the prediction model for SLNM using miR-98, tumor size, and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) with high accuracy (AUC, 0.877). The accuracy of this prediction model was confirmed in the validation set (AUC, 0.883), and it outperformed the conventional Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram. In situ hybridization revealed the localization of miR-98 expression in tumor cells.

CONCLUSIONS

We developed a prediction model consisting of miR-98, tumor size, and LVI for SLNM with high accuracy in ER+/HER2- breast cancer. This model might help decide the indication for SLN biopsy in this subtype.

Sentinel lymph node positivity in patients undergoing mastectomies for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)

Current guidelines recommend sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for patients undergoing mastectomy for a preoperative diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). We examined the factors associated with sentinel lymph node positivity for patients undergoing mastectomy for a diagnosis of DCIS on preoperative core biopsy (PCB). The Institutional Breast Cancer Database was queried for patients with PCB demonstrating pure DCIS followed by mastectomy and SLNB from 2010 to 2018. Patients were divided according to final pathology (DCIS or invasive cancer). Clinico-pathologic variables were analyzed using Pearson's chi-squared, Wilcoxon Rank-Sum and logistic regression. Of 3145 patients, 168(5%) had pure DCIS on PCB and underwent mastectomy with SLNB. On final mastectomy pathology, 120(71%) patients had DCIS with 0 positive sentinel lymph nodes (PSLNs) and 48(29%) patients had invasive carcinoma with 5(10%) cases of ≥1 PSLNs. Factors positively associated with upstaging to invasive cancer in univariate analysis included age (P = .0289), palpability (P < .0001), extent of disease on imaging (P = .0121), mass on preoperative imaging (P = .0003), multifocality (P = .0231) and multicentricity (P = .0395). In multivariate analysis, palpability (P = .0080), extent of disease on imaging (P = .0074) and mass on preoperative imaging (P = .0245) remained significant (Table 2). In a subset of patients undergoing mastectomy for DCIS with limited disease on preoperative evaluation, SLNB may be omitted as the risk of upstaging is low. However, patients who present with clinical findings of palpability, large extent of disease on imaging and mass on preoperative imaging have a meaningful risk of upstaging to invasive cancer, and SLNB remains important for management.

Axillary evaluation is not warranted in patients preoperatively diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ by core needle biopsy

Background

Patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) by core needle biopsy (CNB) have a great chance of upstaging to invasive cancer. Positive axillary status can be found in these patients. This study sought to identify clinicopathological factors associated with upstaging and axillary metastasis in patients preoperatively diagnosed with DCIS by CNB.

Materials and Methods

This study identified 604 patients (cT1‐3N0M0) with preoperative diagnosis of pure DCIS by CNB who had undergone axillary evaluation from August 2006 to December 2015 at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (FUSCC). Predictors of upstaging and axillary lymph nodes metastasis were analyzed, respectively.

Results

Of all 604 patients, 121 (20.03%) and 193 (31.95%) patients were upstaged to DCIS with microinvasion (DCISM) and invasive breast cancer (IBC). Positive axillary lymph nodes were identified in 41 (6.79%) patients. Predictors of upstaging included tumor size on ultrasonography (>2 cm) (OR 1.786, P = .002) and ER+HER2+ status (OR 1.874, P = .022) in multivariate analysis. Factors associated with axillary lymph nodes metastasis included tumor size on pathology (OR 2.336, P = .038) and number of lesions (OR 3.354, P = .039) in multivariate analysis. In addition, upstaging on final pathology had a significant influence on axillary lymph nodes status (P < .001).

Conclusion

Axillary evaluation was recommended in patients with larger tumor size (>2 cm), multifocal lesions or ER+HER2+ status. Despite of a 51.98% upstaging rate, the rate of axillary metastasis in these patients was relatively low, supporting the omission of axillary evaluation in selected patients with low risk of upstaging or axillary metastasis.

Preoperative Delays in the Treatment of DCIS and the Associated Incidence of Invasive Breast Cancer

Background

Although treatment delays have been associated with survival impairment for invasive breast cancer, this has not been thoroughly investigated for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). With trials underway to assess whether DCIS can remain unresected, this study was performed to determine whether longer times to surgery are associated with survival impairment or increased invasion.

Methods

A population-based study of prospectively collected national data derived from women with a clinical diagnosis of DCIS between 2004 and 2014 was conducted using the National Cancer Database. Overall survival (OS) and presence of invasion were assessed as functions of time by evaluating five intervals (≤ 30, 31–60, 61–90, 91–120, 121–365 days) between diagnosis and surgery. Subset analyses assessed those having pathologic DCIS versus invasive cancer on final pathology.

Results

Among 140,615 clinical DCIS patients, 123,947 had pathologic diagnosis of DCIS and 16,668 had invasive ductal carcinoma. For all patients, 5-year OS was 95.8% and unadjusted median delay from diagnosis to surgery was 38 days. With each delay interval increase, added relative risk of death was 7.4% (HR 1.07; 95% CI 1.05–1.10; P < 0.001). On final pathology, 5-year OS for noninvasive patients was 96.0% (95% CI 95.9–96.1%) versus 94.9% (95% CI 94.6–95.3%) for invasive patients. Increasing delay to surgery was an independent predictor of invasion (OR 1.13; 95% CI 1.11–1.15; P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Despite excellent OS for invasive and noninvasive cohorts, invasion was seen more frequently as delay increased. This suggests that DCIS trials evaluating nonoperative management, which represents infinite delay, require long term follow up to ensure outcomes are not compromised.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1245/s10434-019-07844-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Factors associated with upstaging in patients preoperatively diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ by core needle biopsy

Objective

Patients preoperatively diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) by core needle biopsy (CNB) exhibit a significant risk for upstaging on final pathology, which leads to major concerns of whether axillary staging is required at the primary operation. The present study aimed to identify clinicopathological factors associated with upstaging in patients preoperatively diagnosed with DCIS by CNB.

Methods

The present study enrolled 604 patients (cN0M0) with a preoperative diagnosis of pure DCIS by CNB, who underwent axillary staging between August 2006 and December 2015, at Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center (Shanghai, China). Predictive factors of upstaging were analyzed retrospectively.

Results

Of the 604 patients, 20.03% (n = 121) and 31.95% (n = 193) were upstaged to DCIS with microinvasion (DCISM) and invasive breast cancer (IBC) on final pathology, respectively. Larger tumor size on ultrasonography (> 2 cm) was independently associated with upstaging [odds ratio (OR) 1.558,P = 0.014]. Additionally, patients in lower breast imaging reporting and data system (BI-RADS) categories were less likely to be upstaged (4B vs. 5: OR 0.435, P = 0.002; 4C vs. 5: OR 0.502, P = 0.001). Overall, axillary metastasis occurred in 6.79% (n = 41) of patients. Among patients with axillary metastasis, 1.38% (4/290), 3.31% (4/121) and 17.10% (33/193) were in the DCIS, DCISM, and IBC groups, respectively.

Conclusions

For patients initially diagnosed with DCIS by CNB, larger tumor size on ultrasonography (> 2 cm) and higher BI-RADS category were independent predictive factors of upstaging on final pathology. Thus, axillary staging in patients with smaller tumor sizes and lower BI-RADS category may be omitted, with little downstream risk for upstaging.

Trends and clinicopathological predictors of axillary evaluation in ductal carcinoma in situ patients treated with breast-conserving therapy

The aim of this study was to investigate the trends of axillary lymph node evaluation in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients treated with breast-conserving therapy (BCT) and to identify the clinicopathological predictors of axillary evaluation. DCIS patients treated with BCT in 2006-2015 at our institute were retrospectively included in the analysis. Patients were categorized into three groups: sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), and non-evaluation. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors that predicted axillary evaluation. A total of 315 patients were identified, among whom 135 underwent SLNB, and 15 underwent ALND. The proportion of patients who underwent axillary evaluation increased from 33.0% in 2006-2010 to 53.8% in 2011-2015 (P < 0.001), however, no patients had lymph node metastasis based on final pathology. In multivariate analysis, high-grade tumor favored axillary evaluation (OR = 4.376, 95% CI:1.410-13.586, P = 0.011); while excision biopsy favored no axillary evaluation compared with other biopsy methods (OR = 0.418, 95% CI: 0.192-0.909, P = 0.028). Subgroup analysis of patients treated in 2011-2015 revealed that high-grade tumor (OR = 5.898, 95% CI: 1.626-21.390, P = 0.007) and palpable breast lump (OR = 2.497, 95% CI: 1.037-6.011, P = 0.041) were independent predictors of axillary lymph node evaluation. Despite the significant decrease in ALND and a concerning overuse of SLNB, we identified no axillary lymph node metastasis, which justified omitting axillary evaluation in these patients. High-grade tumor, palpable lump, and biopsy method were independent predictors of axillary evaluations. Excision biopsy of suspicious DCIS lesions may potentially preclude the invasive component of the disease and help to avoid axillary surgery.

Current approach and future perspective for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has a good prognosis with the current treatment approach, with a 10-year breast cancer-specific survival rate of 97-98%. In ductal carcinoma in situ without micrometastasis, surgery and postoperative adjuvant therapy significantly improve local control, however it has been reported that the selection of the surgical procedure and adjuvant therapy does not influence breast cancer death. On the other hand, owing to widespread mammography screening, the frequency of early breast cancer detection has increased. In early breast cancer, increased incidence of DCIS is remarkable. However, there is not enough reduction of advanced cancer to match it. Problems with overdiagnosis are now being discussed all over the world. It has been reported that surgery for low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ does not contribute to breast cancer-specific survival. However, it is currently impossible to reliably identify a population that does not progress to invasive cancer even without treatment. Recently, a non-surgery clinical trial for low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ was started. There is a possibility of achieving individualized treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ with less treatment intervention, without compromising the good prognosis obtained with the current treatment approach. This review presents an overview of the current treatment approaches, problems with overdiagnosis and potential future management strategies for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

Is sentinel lymph node biopsy indicated in patients with a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent discussion has suggested that some cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) with high risk of invasive disease may require sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB).

METHODS

Systematic literature review identified 48 studies (9,803 DCIS patients who underwent SLNB). Separate analyses for patients diagnosed preoperatively by core sampling and patients diagnosed postoperatively by specimen pathology were conducted to determine the percentage of patients with axillary nodal involvement. Patient factors were analyzed for associations with risk of nodal involvement.

RESULTS

The mean percentage of positive SLNBs was higher in the preoperative group (5.95% vs 3.02%; P = .0201). Meta-regression analysis showed a direct association with tumor size (P = .0333) and grade (P = .00839) but not median age nor tumor upstage rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The SLNB should be routinely considered in patients with large (>2 cm) high-grade DCIS after a careful multidisciplinary discussion. In the context of breast conserving surgery, the SLNB is not routinely indicated for low- and intermediate-grade DCIS, high-grade DCIS smaller than 2 cm, or pure DCIS diagnosed by definitive surgical excision.

Clinical and pathological assessment of high-risk ductal and lobular breast lesions: What surgeons must know

Terminology in pathology is sometimes over-complicated and may be misinterpreted by clinicians facing patients and having difficulty answering questions posed by them. This may especially be true for some breast lesions with an increased risk of malignant transformation, the complex terminology of which reflects attempts to stratify them according to potential risk. On the basis of morphological and molecular features, both ductal and lobular proliferations have been classified and named in different ways by pathologists, and this often makes it difficult for the treating physicians and the patients to fully understand the nature of the lesions and their associated risks. In order to clarify pathology reports, unambiguous and simple terms are needed.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in clinically detected ductal carcinoma in situ

AIM: To study the indications for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in clinically-detected ductal carcinoma in situ (CD-DCIS).

METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 20 patients with an initial diagnosis of pure DCIS by an image-guided core needle biopsy (CNB) between June 2006 and June 2012 was conducted at King Faisal Specialist Hospital. The accuracy of performing SLNB in CD-DCIS, the rate of sentinel and non-sentinel nodal metastasis, and the histologic underestimation rate of invasive cancer at initial diagnosis were analyzed. The inclusion criteria were a preoperative diagnosis of pure DCIS with no evidence of invasion. We excluded any patient with evidence of microinvasion or invasion. There were two cases of mammographically detected DCIS and 18 cases of CD-DCIS. All our patients were diagnosed by an image-guided CNB except two patients who were diagnosed by fine needle aspiration (FNA). All patients underwent breast surgery, SLNB, and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) if the SLN was positive.

RESULTS: Twenty patients with an initial diagnosis of pure DCIS underwent SLNB, 2 of whom had an ALND. The mean age of the patients was 49.7 years (range, 35-70). Twelve patients (60%) were premenopausal and 8 (40%) were postmenopausal. CNB was the diagnostic procedure for 18 patients, and 2 who were diagnosed by FNA were excluded from the calculation of the underestimation rate. Two out of 20 had a positive SLNB and underwent an ALND and neither had additional non sentinel lymph node metastasis. Both the sentinel visualization rate and the intraoperative sentinel identification rate were 100%. The false negative rate was 0%. Only 2 patients had a positive SLNB (10%) and neither had additional metastasis following an ALND. After definitive surgery, 3 patients were upstaged to invasive ductal carcinoma (3/18 = 16.6%) and 3 other patients were upstaged to DCIS with microinvasion (3/18 = 16.6%). Therefore the histologic underestimation rate of invasive disease was 33%.

CONCLUSION: SLNB in CD-DCIS is technically feasible and highly accurate. We recommend limiting SLNB to patients undergoing a mastectomy.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with breast ductal carcinoma in situ: Chinese experiences

The axillary treatment of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains controversial. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the roles of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with breast DCIS. A database containing the data from 262 patients diagnosed with breast DCIS and 100 patients diagnosed with DCIS with microinvasion (DCISM) who received SLNB between January 2002 and July 2014 was retrospectively analyzed. Of the 262 patients with DCIS, 9 presented with SLN metastases (3 macrometastases and 6 micrometastases). Patients with large tumors diagnosed by ultrasound or with tumors of high histological grade had a higher positive rate of SLNs than those without (P=0.037 and P<0.0001, respectively). Of the 100 patients with DCISM, 11 presented with metastases. Younger patients had a higher positive rate of SLNs (P=0.028). According to the results of this study and the systematic review of recent studies, the indications of SLNB for patients with DCIS are as follows: SLNB should be performed in all DCISM patients and in those DCIS patients who received mastectomy, and could be avoided in those who received breast-conserving surgery. However, SLNB should be recommended to patients who have high risks of harboring invasive components. The risk factors include a large, palpable tumor, a mammographic mass or a high histological grade.

Clinical significance of breast cancer micrometastasis in the sentinel lymph node

The advantages of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in breast cancer patients include an enhanced pathological examination of a small number of sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs), which permits more frequent detection of micrometastasis and isolated tumor cells (ITCs). At the same time, however, SLNB raises two new concerns: whether minimal SLN involvement has a significant impact on survival and whether patients with such minimal involvement should undergo further axillary dissections. Two large randomized studies, ACOSOG Z0011 and IBCSG 23-01, have demonstrated that axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) can be avoided for select SLN-positive patients. However, for patients with macrometastasis in SLN or who do not meet the inclusion criteria of the two studies, ALND is still the standard management. On the other hand, previous studies appear to disagree on the prognostic significance of minimal SLN involvement. One of the reasons for this discrepancy is the great variability among pathological examinations for SLN. The OSNA method, which is a fast molecular detection procedure targeting cytokeratin 19 (CK19) mRNA, has the advantage of reproducibility among institutions and the capability to examine a whole lymph node within 30-40 min. This novel method may thus be able to overcome the issue of variability among conventional pathological examinations.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy is not warranted following a core needle biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast

INTRODUCTION

The role of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is controversial. This study evaluates the risk of clinically relevant SLN metastasis following a core needle biopsy (CNB) diagnosis of pure DCIS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cases that underwent SLNB following a CNB diagnosis of pure DCIS at our institution over a 4.5 year period were evaluated. Parameters including the DCIS characteristics on CNB, the rate of upstaging to invasive carcinoma at excision and the SLNB result were recorded.

RESULTS

Of 296 patients with a CNB diagnosis DCIS, 181 had SLNB (62%). The rate of invasion at excision in those undergoing SLNB was 30% (54/181). SLN metastasis was detected in 7/181 cases (4%), including 6 cases with isolated tumour cells only (3.5%) and only 1 case with a macro-metastatic deposit (0.5%).

CONCLUSION

The risk of clinically significant SLN metastasis following a CNB diagnosis of DCIS is extremely low, despite a relatively high rate of upstaging to invasive carcinoma at excision. Our findings support the opinion that SLNB is not warranted following a CNB diagnosis of DCIS, particularly for those patients undergoing breast conservation surgery.

A simple model to assess the probability of invasion in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast diagnosed by needle biopsy

Objectives. The aim of the study was to develop a clinical prediction model for assessing the probability of having invasive cancer in the definitive surgical resection specimen in patients with biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast, to facilitate decision making regarding axillary surgery. Methods. In 349 women with DCIS, predictors of invasion in the definitive resection specimen were identified. A model to predict the probability of invasion was developed and subsequently simplified to divide patients into two risk categories. The model's performance was validated on another patient population. Results. Multivariate logistic regression revealed four independent predictors of invasion: (i) suspicious (micro)invasion in the biopsy specimen; (ii) visibility of the lesion on ultrasonography; (iii) size of the lesion on mammography >30 mm; (iv) clinical palpability of the lesion. The actual frequency of invasion in the high-risk patient group in the test and validation population was 52.6% and 48.3%, respectively; in the low-risk group it was 16.8% and 7.1%, respectively. Conclusion. The model proved to have good performance. In patients with a low probability of invasion, an axillary procedure can be omitted without a substantial risk of additional surgery.

Ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed at US-guided 14-gauge core-needle biopsy for breast mass: preoperative predictors of invasive breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

To identify preoperative features that could be used to predict invasive breast cancer in women with a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) at ultrasound (US)-guided 14-gauge core needle biopsy (CNB).

METHODS

A total of 86 DCIS lesions that were diagnosed at US-guided 14-gauge CNB and excised surgically in 84 women were assessed. We retrospectively reviewed the patients' medical records, mammography, US, and MR imaging. We compared underestimation rates of DCIS for the collected clinical and radiologic variables and determined the preoperative predictive factors for upstaging to invasive cancer.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven (31.4%) of 86 DCIS lesions were upgraded to invasive cancer. Preoperative features that showed a significantly higher underestimation of DCIS were palpability or nipple discharge (p=0.040), number of core specimens less than 5 (p=0.011), mammographic maximum lesion size of 25 mm or larger (p=0.022), mammographic mass size of 40 mm or larger (p=0.046), sonographic mass size of 32 mm or larger (p=0.009), lesion size of 30 mm on MR (p=0.004), lower signal intensity (SI) on fat-saturated T2-weighted MR images (FS-T2WI) (p=0.005), heterogeneous or rim enhancement on MR images (p=0.009), and apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values lower than 1.04 × 10(-3)mm(2)/s on diffusion-weighted MR imaging (DWI) (p<0.001).

CONCLUSION

Clinical symptom of palpability or nipple discharge, number of core specimen, mammographic maximum lesion or mass size, SI on FS-T2WI, heterogeneous or rim enhancement on MR, and ADC value may be helpful in predicting the upgrade to invasive breast cancer for DCIS diagnosed at US-guided 14-gauge CNB.

Nomogram for predicting invasion in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Background

The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for invasive breast cancer in patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on a preoperative biopsy. These factors were used to develop a nomogram for predicting the risk of invasion in the preoperative setting.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent surgical treatment for DCIS diagnosed before surgery between 1997 and 2009. Multivariable analysis was used to identify clinical, radiological and histopathological factors that may predict upstaging. A nomogram was developed to predict the probability of invasion using multiple logistic regression analysis. This nomogram was subsequently validated using another cohort of patients with a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS between 2010 and 2012.

Results

Upstaging to invasive cancer occurred in 123 (24.9 per cent) of 493 women treated between 1997 and 2009. A larger DCIS lesion (at least 15 mm), lack of hormone receptor expression, intermediate or high nuclear grade, diagnosis on core biopsy compared with vacuum-assisted biopsy, and non-cribriform subtype of DCIS were significantly associated with upstaging. A nomogram developed using these factors demonstrated good predictive performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) 0·823, 95 per cent confidence interval 0·787 to 0·860). The nomogram showed similar predictive performance in the validation data set, based on another 149 women (AUC 0·700, 0·613 to 0·786).

Conclusion

Upstaging to invasive cancer in women with a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS is common. A nomogram based on the five most significant factors related to upstaging accurately predicted invasive cancer. This nomogram may be useful when deciding whether to pursue axillary staging with sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with DCIS.

Development and evaluation of a prediction model for underestimated invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma in situ at stereotactic large core needle biopsy

BACKGROUND

We aimed to develop a multivariable model for prediction of underestimated invasiveness in women with ductal carcinoma in situ at stereotactic large core needle biopsy, that can be used to select patients for sentinel node biopsy at primary surgery.

METHODS

From the literature, we selected potential preoperative predictors of underestimated invasive breast cancer. Data of patients with nonpalpable breast lesions who were diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ at stereotactic large core needle biopsy, drawn from the prospective COBRA (Core Biopsy after RAdiological localization) and COBRA2000 cohort studies, were used to fit the multivariable model and assess its overall performance, discrimination, and calibration.

RESULTS

348 women with large core needle biopsy-proven ductal carcinoma in situ were available for analysis. In 100 (28.7%) patients invasive carcinoma was found at subsequent surgery. Nine predictors were included in the model. In the multivariable analysis, the predictors with the strongest association were lesion size (OR 1.12 per cm, 95% CI 0.98-1.28), number of cores retrieved at biopsy (OR per core 0.87, 95% CI 0.75-1.01), presence of lobular cancerization (OR 5.29, 95% CI 1.25-26.77), and microinvasion (OR 3.75, 95% CI 1.42-9.87). The overall performance of the multivariable model was poor with an explained variation of 9% (Nagelkerke's R(2)), mediocre discrimination with area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.66 (95% confidence interval 0.58-0.73), and fairly good calibration.

CONCLUSION

The evaluation of our multivariable prediction model in a large, clinically representative study population proves that routine clinical and pathological variables are not suitable to select patients with large core needle biopsy-proven ductal carcinoma in situ for sentinel node biopsy during primary surgery.

Prediction of underestimated invasiveness in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast on percutaneous biopsy as rationale for recommending concurrent sentinel lymph node biopsy

AIM

To develop a model to predict invasion and improve the indication of concurrent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on minimally invasive biopsy.

METHODS

We evaluated the data of 205 patients with DCIS in minimally invasive biopsy specimens. Clinical, radiological and histological variables were assessed in order to identify predictors of invasive carcinoma in final pathology using logistic regression analyses. We developed and retrospectively tested an algorithm to indicate concurrent SLNB.

RESULTS

Invasiveness was underestimated in 18.0% (37 of 205). Univariate analysis revealed the following significant risk factors: lesion palpability, a mass lesion on ultrasound, the presence of a mammographically detectable mass, architectural distortion or density, a BI-RADS score of 5, a lesion diameter ≥50 mm, and ≥50% of histologically affected ducts. With a palpable mass, which remained the only independent predictor of invasion after multivariate adjustment, and the presence of at least three of the remaining five risk factors, the probability of invasion was 56.0%. If the prediction model had been used to indicate SLNB 9.8% (20 of 205) of patients could have been benefited (i.e. spared unnecessary or correctly recommended concurrent SLNB) compared to the factual performed SLNB procedures. Those patients with pure DCIS treated with breast conserving surgery (BCS) benefited most with a relative risk reduction of nearly 50% for unnecessary SLNB.

CONCLUSION

The prediction model could rationally guide an informed discussion about risks and benefits of concurrent SLNB in patients with DCIS on minimally invasive biopsy.

[Predictive factors of invasion with initial diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ based on core biopsy]

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies suggest that sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) should not be performed in case of pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) routinely. In order to avoid a second operation for invasive cancer detected postoperatively the chance of invasion need to be determined preoperatively. The purpose of our retrospective study was to evaluate the sensitivity of core biopsy and determine the predictive value of clinical and histological factors of invasion in cases when DCIS diagnosed preoperatively.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January 2006 and December 2011, 1311 patients were treated for breast cancer in our institute, of whom preoperative core biopsy showed DCIS in 50 cases. Wide excision or quadrantectomy was performed in 41 cases, re-excision was necessary in 6 cases for positive surgical margins and mastectomy was carried out in four patients for multicentricity. In further 9 cases extensive tumour size indicated mastectomy straight away. SLNB was carried out in 31 patients, axillary block dissection (ABD) in 8 patients, while ABD for positive sentinel nodes in another two cases. Pathology showed invasion in 17 (34,7 %) cases.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis showed that tumour grade, symptomatic disease, patients' age were significant predictors of invasion. Although preoperative tumour size also showed correlation with invasiveness, this was statistically not significant.

CONCLUSION

Evaluation of a larger patient population might be helpful to identify women who should undergo tumour excision and SLNB as a single step operation due to increased risk of invasive disease despite the preoperative diagnosis of DCIS.

Utilization of lymph node assessment in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with lumpectomy

BACKGROUND

Lymph node assessment (LNA), including sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), is controversial in patients undergoing lumpectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Our goal was to identify factors influencing LNA in these patients.

METHODS

We used the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database to identify all female patients treated with lumpectomy for DCIS from 2000 to 2008. We excluded patients without histologic confirmation, including those diagnosed at autopsy, and those for whom LNA status was unknown. Multivariate logistic regression models predicted use of LNA. Likelihood of undergoing LNA was reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 62,935 patients met inclusion criteria. Approximately 15% (N = 9726) had regional LNA at the time of lumpectomy, with 12% (N = 7294) undergoing SLNB. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of undergoing LNA included treatment in the Southeast (OR 1.25, CI 1.04-1.22); treatment after the year 2000; grade II (OR 2.71, CI 2.48-2.96), III (OR 2.38, CI 2.18-2.59), or IV (OR 2.61, CI 2.37-2.88) tumors; DCIS size 2-5 cm (OR 1.49, CI 1.37-1.62) or >5 cm (OR 2.16, CI 1.78-2.61), and estrogen receptor-negative (OR 1.29, CI 1.16-1.43) or progesterone receptor-negative (OR 1.22, CI 1.11-1.33) tumors. Factors associated with a decreased likelihood of undergoing regional LNA were age >60 (OR 0.83, CI 0.79-0.87), and Asian race (OR 0.88, CI 0.81-0.96). Factors predictive of LNA in general were also predictive of SLNB.

CONCLUSIONS

Although LNA is controversial for patients undergoing lumpectomy for DCIS, it is used in 15% of cases. Further research establishing for the benefit of LNA in DCIS patients treated with lumpectomy is needed.